Jump to content
  • Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  
Telamon

OpenGL Thinking of making a tilemap with DirectX? Read this.

This topic is 4433 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

My rogue-like game is undergoing fundamental restructuring to allow all entities to be read in from XML files. I wouldn't call it a rewrite, really. Only the base classes have required refactoring, thanks to what I now feel is a pretty good OO design. Anyways, in the process of doing this, I had an excellent opprotunity to rework my MapCtrl, which is a component that attaches to a Map and renders it using Direct3D. I thought I would share my experience trying to get performant tilemap rendering out of DirectX in case anyone else was tempted to go this route now or in the future. DirectX is unweildy for making simple 2D games because DirectDraw has been deprecated - so to do anything graphical, you need to use Direct3D. Originally, I just wanted to get something working, so I was rendering my tilemap in a very straightforward way. I have a vertex buffer holding a quad that I would translate over the map, drawing one tile at a time. This gave me awful performance (1.5 FPS with a 100x100 fully in view). After much research, I learned that changing render states is very expensive in D3D. Specifically, set texture and DrawPrimitive calls. In order to get a fast tilemap in D3D, it is necessary to do the following: 1. Batch all your textures. To minimize texture changes, you need to put all your tiles onto one (or possibly several) larger textures. 2. Use dynamic vertex buffers to blast several thousand polies to the screen at once. For each tile you want to add, you append the geometry to the buffer and set the texture coordinates to corrospond to your batched tile. Using an index buffer is a good idea, you will use 33% less bandwidth piping geometry to the GPU. 3. When the dynamic buffer fills up, or you need to make a texture swap, write out the buffer with DrawIndexedPrimitives, and start to fill it up again. 4. Clearly you only do this for onscreen tiles. 5. If you have a ton of textures, you should sort your tiles to minimize texture swaps. This probably isn't an issue since even my Geforce 440 Go supports 2048x2048 textures and you can put a lot of tiles into a bitmap that large. I just got this working today, after fighting with DirectX for the past couple of days. I do get really good performance: 70 FPS rendering a 100x100 tilemap, fully in view (at arbitrary scale). But it took more effort than it should have. I needed this level of performance so that I can run animations at 30 FPS without needing dirty rectangle techniques and without driving my CPU to 100% (my computer sounds like a jet plane taking off when it gets going). But probably, if you will be much happier with OpenGL or SDL if you want to make a simple graphical tilemap. My 2c. --- PS - Thanks to Barakus and EDI for helping me fix the issues I was having with my tilemap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement
This is what I do in my 2D sidescroller too. The artist creates 256x256 textures, and the map editor uses these to paint tiles on the map. When the game loads the map, it gets a list of all the textures it needs, and works out the best size to use (512x512, 1024x1024, 2048x2048 or 4096x4096) based on the number of textures required, the amount of space that would be wasted, and the maxiumum texture size the card supports.
Example: One map requires 7 different 256x256 textures. That means that the game can chose to use a 1024x1024 texture, and waste 9 256x256 areas, or it can chose to use two 512x512 textures, and only wast 1 256x256 texture area.
Also note that most ATi cards only support up to 2048x2048, apart from the latest ones (X1xxx cards).

Another thing you could try doing (I don't, but I intend to) is if your visible map area is 30x20 or something, you can fill the VB with 32x22 tiles, and then just use the world matrix to translate the map. That means you only need to fill the vertex buffer when a new tile comes into view, which should give you a bit of performance.

Using index buffers is pointless for 2D tile engines, since each vertex is used exactly once (Due to texture coordinates being different where vertices could be shared). So you're just as well to render as much as possible (often the whole screen) in one DrawPrimitive() call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Evil Steve
...
Using index buffers is pointless for 2D tile engines, since each vertex is used exactly once (Due to texture coordinates being different where vertices could be shared). So you're just as well to render as much as possible (often the whole screen) in one DrawPrimitive() call.

Actually, for each quad, you can cut the number of vertices down from 6 to 4, since the two triangles that make up the quad do indeed share two vertices, texture coordinates and all. (Thus Telamon's 33% less bandwidth figure.) I'm guessing you probably knew this, but just briefly forgot about it. But for anyone else's information...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yea, D3dX sprite functionality make 2d games an absolute breeze. Direct Draw is crap. They did good to abandon it.

An old game I did a few years ago in school was incredibly easy with d3dx sprite.

Game

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Telamon
DirectX is unweildy for making simple 2D games because DirectDraw has been deprecated - so to do anything graphical, you need to use Direct3D. Originally, I just wanted to get something working, so I was rendering my tilemap in a very straightforward way. I have a vertex buffer holding a quad that I would translate over the map, drawing one tile at a time. This gave me awful performance (1.5 FPS with a 100x100 fully in view).


I'm getting really tired of this "bring back DiriectDraw" crap. Direct3D isn't that hard, don't blame it because you couldn't research the proper way to do things. D3D can do ANYTHING DirectDraw can, some even FASTER than DirectDraw.

For my TileStudio loader and Snake.Net , I used the Managed Direct3D sprite class and the frame rate is fine even in debug mode.

I'm sorry if this post sounds mean, but I've gotten tired of having to defend D3D every few days. Don't bash an API you don't know how to use. I'm sure the OGL crowd wouldn't like it if I went in and said "OMG I can't draw 1000000000 quads at once, OGL SUCKS!!!!111!".

Edit: Thanks DrEvil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telamon, there must be something else in your code that's straining DirectX: I can do 4 layers with tiles spanning two textures, using simple DrawPrimitiveUP (insert BOOs here), some alphablended and a background image without any framerate problems on a P3 800.

Do you cache your renderstate sets? Do you use several tiles on a single texture? Any reason you can't use pretransformed vertices?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My 2-pence for what it's worth...

Quote:
DirectX is unweildy for making simple 2D games because DirectDraw has been deprecated
I'm with Scet on this one. I will concede that the initial learning curve (or is it a hurdle?) is steeper, but the rewards are awesome. My experiences in the good old-days were that you could get something simple up and running in DD7 very quickly but you could quite quickly hit it's limits. Once you'd hit the limits you either had to stop or invest a lot of time developing custom code and/or work-arounds. In the long-run Direct3D doesn't have this problem in my experience.

Quote:
I was rendering my tilemap in a very straightforward way. I have a vertex buffer holding a quad that I would translate over the map, drawing one tile at a time. This gave me awful performance (1.5 FPS with a 100x100 fully in view).
(emphasis mine) Does not surprise me in the slightest that you got crap performance this way [smile] 100x100 tiles would generate 10,000 Draw**() calls which is optimistically only 10x higher than any Direct3D 9 application should be generating [lol]

Quote:
1. Batch all your textures. To minimize texture changes, you need to put all your tiles onto one (or possibly several) larger textures.
Agreed, this is a definite performance advantage.

Quote:
2. Use dynamic vertex buffers to blast several thousand polies to the screen at once. For each tile you want to add, you append the geometry to the buffer and set the texture coordinates to corrospond to your batched tile. Using an index buffer is a good idea, you will use 33% less bandwidth piping geometry to the GPU.
Makes sense, but a far bigger gain in my experience is to not modify the geometry in the main loop. It's not easy to architect, but it's complication that gets you a cookie [smile]

Two optimizations I did in one of my tile-based engines was to store a CPU-side cache of the visible set (located in RAM = fast(er) CPU manipulation) and only ever updated the buffers when the camera/player moved. Because of the CPU-side cache I could throw a single chunk of vertex data (note: index data never changes) up between a lock (no processing between Lock()/Unlock() [wink]) and take full advantage of no-overwrite/discard/dynamic buffers.

Quote:
I do get really good performance: 70 FPS rendering a 100x100 tilemap
That's not bad, but I suspect you're actually clamped to a 70hz refresh rate rather than it actually being the upper performance limit.

Now, for an interesting idea... I had a "pure 3D" tile-map engine a while back that could render enough 2x2 tiles to cover a 1024x768 screen (roughly 200,000 tiles) to still clock up around 25-30hz - which is just over 7x the triangle throughput of your example [smile]

Okay, I don't wish to be cocky - but just thought it was an interesting example of what should be possible given a bit of effort.

By sticking to regular 3D geometry, that is, not POSITIONT or D3DFVF_XYZRHW and an orthogonal view you can move pretty much every piece of graphics related work to the GPU. No more resource manipulation required, hardware accelerated vertex effects (e.g. lighting and animation). The only difficult part in implementing it this way is everyones favourite texels-pixels mapping. In my example I didn't really need that so I conveniently ignored it, but it should be solveable.

Quote:
I can do 4 layers with tiles spanning two textures, using simple DrawPrimitiveUP (insert BOOs here)
* boo... hiss... *

Cheers,
Jack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Agony
Quote:
Original post by Evil Steve
...
Using index buffers is pointless for 2D tile engines, since each vertex is used exactly once (Due to texture coordinates being different where vertices could be shared). So you're just as well to render as much as possible (often the whole screen) in one DrawPrimitive() call.

Actually, for each quad, you can cut the number of vertices down from 6 to 4, since the two triangles that make up the quad do indeed share two vertices, texture coordinates and all. (Thus Telamon's 33% less bandwidth figure.) I'm guessing you probably knew this, but just briefly forgot about it. But for anyone else's information...
Ah, I had a mental blank there [smile]

What I meant was, if you have a grid of tiles (E.g. 30x20), then you can't share the top right vertex of the first tile with the top left vertex of the second tile for instance.
You can still render them as triangle strips, but you'd end up having to make one DrawPrimitive() call per tile, or end up using a bunch of degenerate triangles (Actually, an index buffer might help there).

Has anyone done any profiling about this? It'll probably be pretty close, performance-wise anyway...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Advertisement
  • Advertisement
  • Popular Tags

  • Popular Now

  • Advertisement
  • Similar Content

    • By mmmax3d
      Hi everyone,
      I would need some assistance from anyone who has a similar experience
      or a nice idea!
      I have created a skybox (as cube) and now I need to add a floor/ground.
      The skybox is created from cubemap and initially it was infinite.
      Now it is finite with a specific size. The floor is a quad in the middle
      of the skybox, like a horizon.
      I have two problems:
      When moving the skybox upwards or downwards, I need to
      sample from points even above the horizon while sampling
      from the botton at the same time.  I am trying to create a seamless blending of the texture
      at the points of the horizon, when the quad is connected
      to the skybox. However, I get skew effects. Does anybody has done sth similar?
      Is there any good practice?
      Thanks everyone!
    • By mmmax3d
      Hi everyone,
      I would need some assistance from anyone who has a similar experience
      or a nice idea!
      I have created a skybox (as cube) and now I need to add a floor/ground.
      The skybox is created from cubemap and initially it was infinite.
      Now it is finite with a specific size. The floor is a quad in the middle
      of the skybox, like a horizon.
      I have two problems:
      When moving the skybox upwards or downwards, I need to
      sample from points even above the horizon while sampling
      from the botton at the same time.  I am trying to create a seamless blending of the texture
      at the points of the horizon, when the quad is connected
      to the skybox. However, I get skew effects. Does anybody has done sth similar?
      Is there any good practice?
      Thanks everyone!
    • By iArtist93
      I'm trying to implement PBR into my simple OpenGL renderer and trying to use multiple lighting passes, I'm using one pass per light for rendering as follow:
      1- First pass = depth
      2- Second pass = ambient
      3- [3 .. n] for all the lights in the scene.
      I'm using the blending function glBlendFunc(GL_ONE, GL_ONE) for passes [3..n], and i'm doing a Gamma Correction at the end of each fragment shader.
      But i still have a problem with the output image it just looks noisy specially when i'm using texture maps.
      Is there anything wrong with those steps or is there any improvement to this process?
    • By babaliaris
      Hello Everyone!
      I'm learning openGL, and currently i'm making a simple 2D game engine to test what I've learn so far.  In order to not say to much, i made a video in which i'm showing you the behavior of the rendering.
      Video: 
       
      What i was expecting to happen, was the player moving around. When i render only the player, he moves as i would expect. When i add a second Sprite object, instead of the Player, this new sprite object is moving and finally if i add a third Sprite object the third one is moving. And the weird think is that i'm transforming the Vertices of the Player so why the transformation is being applied somewhere else?
       
      Take a look at my code:
      Sprite Class
      (You mostly need to see the Constructor, the Render Method and the Move Method)
      #include "Brain.h" #include <glm/gtc/matrix_transform.hpp> #include <vector> struct Sprite::Implementation { //Position. struct pos pos; //Tag. std::string tag; //Texture. Texture *texture; //Model matrix. glm::mat4 model; //Vertex Array Object. VertexArray *vao; //Vertex Buffer Object. VertexBuffer *vbo; //Layout. VertexBufferLayout *layout; //Index Buffer Object. IndexBuffer *ibo; //Shader. Shader *program; //Brains. std::vector<Brain *> brains; //Deconstructor. ~Implementation(); }; Sprite::Sprite(std::string image_path, std::string tag, float x, float y) { //Create Pointer To Implementaion. m_Impl = new Implementation(); //Set the Position of the Sprite object. m_Impl->pos.x = x; m_Impl->pos.y = y; //Set the tag. m_Impl->tag = tag; //Create The Texture. m_Impl->texture = new Texture(image_path); //Initialize the model Matrix. m_Impl->model = glm::mat4(1.0f); //Get the Width and the Height of the Texture. int width = m_Impl->texture->GetWidth(); int height = m_Impl->texture->GetHeight(); //Create the Verticies. float verticies[] = { //Positions //Texture Coordinates. x, y, 0.0f, 0.0f, x + width, y, 1.0f, 0.0f, x + width, y + height, 1.0f, 1.0f, x, y + height, 0.0f, 1.0f }; //Create the Indicies. unsigned int indicies[] = { 0, 1, 2, 2, 3, 0 }; //Create Vertex Array. m_Impl->vao = new VertexArray(); //Create the Vertex Buffer. m_Impl->vbo = new VertexBuffer((void *)verticies, sizeof(verticies)); //Create The Layout. m_Impl->layout = new VertexBufferLayout(); m_Impl->layout->PushFloat(2); m_Impl->layout->PushFloat(2); m_Impl->vao->AddBuffer(m_Impl->vbo, m_Impl->layout); //Create the Index Buffer. m_Impl->ibo = new IndexBuffer(indicies, 6); //Create the new shader. m_Impl->program = new Shader("Shaders/SpriteShader.shader"); } //Render. void Sprite::Render(Window * window) { //Create the projection Matrix based on the current window width and height. glm::mat4 proj = glm::ortho(0.0f, (float)window->GetWidth(), 0.0f, (float)window->GetHeight(), -1.0f, 1.0f); //Set the MVP Uniform. m_Impl->program->setUniformMat4f("u_MVP", proj * m_Impl->model); //Run All The Brains (Scripts) of this game object (sprite). for (unsigned int i = 0; i < m_Impl->brains.size(); i++) { //Get Current Brain. Brain *brain = m_Impl->brains[i]; //Call the start function only once! if (brain->GetStart()) { brain->SetStart(false); brain->Start(); } //Call the update function every frame. brain->Update(); } //Render. window->GetRenderer()->Draw(m_Impl->vao, m_Impl->ibo, m_Impl->texture, m_Impl->program); } void Sprite::Move(float speed, bool left, bool right, bool up, bool down) { if (left) { m_Impl->pos.x -= speed; m_Impl->model = glm::translate(m_Impl->model, glm::vec3(-speed, 0, 0)); } if (right) { m_Impl->pos.x += speed; m_Impl->model = glm::translate(m_Impl->model, glm::vec3(speed, 0, 0)); } if (up) { m_Impl->pos.y += speed; m_Impl->model = glm::translate(m_Impl->model, glm::vec3(0, speed, 0)); } if (down) { m_Impl->pos.y -= speed; m_Impl->model = glm::translate(m_Impl->model, glm::vec3(0, -speed, 0)); } } void Sprite::AddBrain(Brain * brain) { //Push back the brain object. m_Impl->brains.push_back(brain); } pos *Sprite::GetPos() { return &m_Impl->pos; } std::string Sprite::GetTag() { return m_Impl->tag; } int Sprite::GetWidth() { return m_Impl->texture->GetWidth(); } int Sprite::GetHeight() { return m_Impl->texture->GetHeight(); } Sprite::~Sprite() { delete m_Impl; } //Implementation Deconstructor. Sprite::Implementation::~Implementation() { delete texture; delete vao; delete vbo; delete layout; delete ibo; delete program; }  
      Renderer Class
      #include "Renderer.h" #include "Error.h" Renderer::Renderer() { } Renderer::~Renderer() { } void Renderer::Draw(VertexArray * vao, IndexBuffer * ibo, Texture *texture, Shader * program) { vao->Bind(); ibo->Bind(); program->Bind(); if (texture != NULL) texture->Bind(); GLCall(glDrawElements(GL_TRIANGLES, ibo->GetCount(), GL_UNSIGNED_INT, NULL)); } void Renderer::Clear(float r, float g, float b) { GLCall(glClearColor(r, g, b, 1.0)); GLCall(glClear(GL_COLOR_BUFFER_BIT)); } void Renderer::Update(GLFWwindow *window) { /* Swap front and back buffers */ glfwSwapBuffers(window); /* Poll for and process events */ glfwPollEvents(); }  
      Shader Code
      #shader vertex #version 330 core layout(location = 0) in vec4 aPos; layout(location = 1) in vec2 aTexCoord; out vec2 t_TexCoord; uniform mat4 u_MVP; void main() { gl_Position = u_MVP * aPos; t_TexCoord = aTexCoord; } #shader fragment #version 330 core out vec4 aColor; in vec2 t_TexCoord; uniform sampler2D u_Texture; void main() { aColor = texture(u_Texture, t_TexCoord); } Also i'm pretty sure that every time i'm hitting the up, down, left and right arrows on the keyboard, i'm changing the model Matrix of the Player and not the others.
       
      Window Class:
      #include "Window.h" #include <GL/glew.h> #include <GLFW/glfw3.h> #include "Error.h" #include "Renderer.h" #include "Scene.h" #include "Input.h" //Global Variables. int screen_width, screen_height; //On Window Resize. void OnWindowResize(GLFWwindow *window, int width, int height); //Implementation Structure. struct Window::Implementation { //GLFW Window. GLFWwindow *GLFW_window; //Renderer. Renderer *renderer; //Delta Time. double delta_time; //Frames Per Second. int fps; //Scene. Scene *scnene; //Input. Input *input; //Deconstructor. ~Implementation(); }; //Window Constructor. Window::Window(std::string title, int width, int height) { //Initializing width and height. screen_width = width; screen_height = height; //Create Pointer To Implementation. m_Impl = new Implementation(); //Try initializing GLFW. if (!glfwInit()) { std::cout << "GLFW could not be initialized!" << std::endl; std::cout << "Press ENTER to exit..." << std::endl; std::cin.get(); exit(-1); } //Setting up OpenGL Version 3.3 Core Profile. glfwWindowHint(GLFW_CONTEXT_VERSION_MAJOR, 3); glfwWindowHint(GLFW_CONTEXT_VERSION_MINOR, 3); glfwWindowHint(GLFW_OPENGL_PROFILE, GLFW_OPENGL_CORE_PROFILE); /* Create a windowed mode window and its OpenGL context */ m_Impl->GLFW_window = glfwCreateWindow(width, height, title.c_str(), NULL, NULL); if (!m_Impl->GLFW_window) { std::cout << "GLFW could not create a window!" << std::endl; std::cout << "Press ENTER to exit..." << std::endl; std::cin.get(); glfwTerminate(); exit(-1); } /* Make the window's context current */ glfwMakeContextCurrent(m_Impl->GLFW_window); //Initialize GLEW. if(glewInit() != GLEW_OK) { std::cout << "GLEW could not be initialized!" << std::endl; std::cout << "Press ENTER to exit..." << std::endl; std::cin.get(); glfwTerminate(); exit(-1); } //Enabling Blending. GLCall(glEnable(GL_BLEND)); GLCall(glBlendFunc(GL_SRC_ALPHA, GL_ONE_MINUS_SRC_ALPHA)); //Setting the ViewPort. GLCall(glViewport(0, 0, width, height)); //**********Initializing Implementation**********// m_Impl->renderer = new Renderer(); m_Impl->delta_time = 0.0; m_Impl->fps = 0; m_Impl->input = new Input(this); //**********Initializing Implementation**********// //Set Frame Buffer Size Callback. glfwSetFramebufferSizeCallback(m_Impl->GLFW_window, OnWindowResize); } //Window Deconstructor. Window::~Window() { delete m_Impl; } //Window Main Loop. void Window::MainLoop() { //Time Variables. double start_time = 0, end_time = 0, old_time = 0, total_time = 0; //Frames Counter. int frames = 0; /* Loop until the user closes the window */ while (!glfwWindowShouldClose(m_Impl->GLFW_window)) { old_time = start_time; //Total time of previous frame. start_time = glfwGetTime(); //Current frame start time. //Calculate the Delta Time. m_Impl->delta_time = start_time - old_time; //Get Frames Per Second. if (total_time >= 1) { m_Impl->fps = frames; total_time = 0; frames = 0; } //Clearing The Screen. m_Impl->renderer->Clear(0, 0, 0); //Render The Scene. if (m_Impl->scnene != NULL) m_Impl->scnene->Render(this); //Updating the Screen. m_Impl->renderer->Update(m_Impl->GLFW_window); //Increasing frames counter. frames++; //End Time. end_time = glfwGetTime(); //Total time after the frame completed. total_time += end_time - start_time; } //Terminate GLFW. glfwTerminate(); } //Load Scene. void Window::LoadScene(Scene * scene) { //Set the scene. m_Impl->scnene = scene; } //Get Delta Time. double Window::GetDeltaTime() { return m_Impl->delta_time; } //Get FPS. int Window::GetFPS() { return m_Impl->fps; } //Get Width. int Window::GetWidth() { return screen_width; } //Get Height. int Window::GetHeight() { return screen_height; } //Get Input. Input * Window::GetInput() { return m_Impl->input; } Renderer * Window::GetRenderer() { return m_Impl->renderer; } GLFWwindow * Window::GetGLFWindow() { return m_Impl->GLFW_window; } //Implementation Deconstructor. Window::Implementation::~Implementation() { delete renderer; delete input; } //OnWindowResize void OnWindowResize(GLFWwindow *window, int width, int height) { screen_width = width; screen_height = height; //Updating the ViewPort. GLCall(glViewport(0, 0, width, height)); }  
      Brain Class
      #include "Brain.h" #include "Sprite.h" #include "Window.h" struct Brain::Implementation { //Just A Flag. bool started; //Window Pointer. Window *window; //Sprite Pointer. Sprite *sprite; }; Brain::Brain(Window *window, Sprite *sprite) { //Create Pointer To Implementation. m_Impl = new Implementation(); //Initialize Implementation. m_Impl->started = true; m_Impl->window = window; m_Impl->sprite = sprite; } Brain::~Brain() { //Delete Pointer To Implementation. delete m_Impl; } void Brain::Start() { } void Brain::Update() { } Window * Brain::GetWindow() { return m_Impl->window; } Sprite * Brain::GetSprite() { return m_Impl->sprite; } bool Brain::GetStart() { return m_Impl->started; } void Brain::SetStart(bool value) { m_Impl->started = value; } Script Class (Its a Brain Subclass!!!)
      #include "Script.h" Script::Script(Window *window, Sprite *sprite) : Brain(window, sprite) { } Script::~Script() { } void Script::Start() { std::cout << "Game Started!" << std::endl; } void Script::Update() { Input *input = this->GetWindow()->GetInput(); Sprite *sp = this->GetSprite(); //Move this sprite. this->GetSprite()->Move(200 * this->GetWindow()->GetDeltaTime(), input->GetKeyDown("left"), input->GetKeyDown("right"), input->GetKeyDown("up"), input->GetKeyDown("down")); std::cout << sp->GetTag().c_str() << ".x = " << sp->GetPos()->x << ", " << sp->GetTag().c_str() << ".y = " << sp->GetPos()->y << std::endl; }  
      Main:
      #include "SpaceShooterEngine.h" #include "Script.h" int main() { Window w("title", 600,600); Scene *scene = new Scene(); Sprite *player = new Sprite("Resources/Images/player.png", "Player", 100,100); Sprite *other = new Sprite("Resources/Images/cherno.png", "Other", 400, 100); Sprite *other2 = new Sprite("Resources/Images/cherno.png", "Other", 300, 400); Brain *brain = new Script(&w, player); player->AddBrain(brain); scene->AddSprite(player); scene->AddSprite(other); scene->AddSprite(other2); w.LoadScene(scene); w.MainLoop(); return 0; }  
       
      I literally can't find what is wrong. If you need more code, ask me to post it. I will also attach all the source files.
      Brain.cpp
      Error.cpp
      IndexBuffer.cpp
      Input.cpp
      Renderer.cpp
      Scene.cpp
      Shader.cpp
      Sprite.cpp
      Texture.cpp
      VertexArray.cpp
      VertexBuffer.cpp
      VertexBufferLayout.cpp
      Window.cpp
      Brain.h
      Error.h
      IndexBuffer.h
      Input.h
      Renderer.h
      Scene.h
      Shader.h
      SpaceShooterEngine.h
      Sprite.h
      Texture.h
      VertexArray.h
      VertexBuffer.h
      VertexBufferLayout.h
      Window.h
    • By Cristian Decu
      Hello fellow programmers,
      For a couple of days now i've decided to build my own planet renderer just to see how floating point precision issues
      can be tackled. As you probably imagine, i've quickly faced FPP issues when trying to render absurdly large planets.
       
      I have used the classical quadtree LOD approach;
      I've generated my grids with 33 vertices, (x: -1 to 1, y: -1 to 1, z = 0).
      Each grid is managed by a TerrainNode class that, depending on the side it represents (top, bottom, left right, front, back),
      creates a special rotation-translation matrix that moves and rotates the grid away from the origin so that when i finally
      normalize all the vertices on my vertex shader i can get a perfect sphere.
      T = glm::translate(glm::dmat4(1.0), glm::dvec3(0.0, 0.0, 1.0)); R = glm::rotate(glm::dmat4(1.0), glm::radians(180.0), glm::dvec3(1.0, 0.0, 0.0)); sides[0] = new TerrainNode(1.0, radius, T * R, glm::dvec2(0.0, 0.0), new TerrainTile(1.0, SIDE_FRONT)); T = glm::translate(glm::dmat4(1.0), glm::dvec3(0.0, 0.0, -1.0)); R = glm::rotate(glm::dmat4(1.0), glm::radians(0.0), glm::dvec3(1.0, 0.0, 0.0)); sides[1] = new TerrainNode(1.0, radius, R * T, glm::dvec2(0.0, 0.0), new TerrainTile(1.0, SIDE_BACK)); // So on and so forth for the rest of the sides As you can see, for the front side grid, i rotate it 180 degrees to make it face the camera and push it towards the eye;
      the back side is handled almost the same way only that i don't need to rotate it but simply push it away from the eye.
      The same technique is applied for the rest of the faces (obviously, with the proper rotations / translations).
      The matrix that result from the multiplication of R and T (in that particular order) is send to my vertex shader as `r_Grid'.
      // spherify vec3 V = normalize((r_Grid * vec4(r_Vertex, 1.0)).xyz); gl_Position = r_ModelViewProjection * vec4(V, 1.0); The `r_ModelViewProjection' matrix is generated on the CPU in this manner.
      // No the most efficient way, but it works. glm::dmat4 Camera::getMatrix() { // Create the view matrix // Roll, Yaw and Pitch are all quaternions. glm::dmat4 View = glm::toMat4(Roll) * glm::toMat4(Pitch) * glm::toMat4(Yaw); // The model matrix is generated by translating in the oposite direction of the camera. glm::dmat4 Model = glm::translate(glm::dmat4(1.0), -Position); // Projection = glm::perspective(fovY, aspect, zNear, zFar); // zNear = 0.1, zFar = 1.0995116e12 return Projection * View * Model; } I managed to get rid of z-fighting by using a technique called Logarithmic Depth Buffer described in this article; it works amazingly well, no z-fighting at all, at least not visible.
      Each frame i'm rendering each node by sending the generated matrices this way.
      // set the r_ModelViewProjection uniform // Sneak in the mRadiusMatrix which is a matrix that contains the radius of my planet. Shader::setUniform(0, Camera::getInstance()->getMatrix() * mRadiusMatrix); // set the r_Grid matrix uniform i created earlier. Shader::setUniform(1, r_Grid); grid->render(); My planet's radius is around 6400000.0 units, absurdly large, but that's what i really want to achieve;
      Everything works well, the node's split and merge as you'd expect, however whenever i get close to the surface
      of the planet the rounding errors start to kick in giving me that lovely stairs effect.
      I've read that if i could render each grid relative to the camera i could get better precision on the surface, effectively
      getting rid of those rounding errors.
       
      My question is how can i achieve this relative to camera rendering in my scenario here?
      I know that i have to do most of the work on the CPU with double, and that's exactly what i'm doing.
      I only use double on the CPU side where i also do most of the matrix multiplications.
      As you can see from my vertex shader i only do the usual r_ModelViewProjection * (some vertex coords).
       
      Thank you for your suggestions!
       
  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

Participate in the game development conversation and more when you create an account on GameDev.net!

Sign me up!